Muse Wonder vs the Leading AI Models (2026)
Last verified: October 28, 2026 · Unofficial comparison site · Data sources: Artificial Analysis, vendor announcements
Meta released Muse Wonder on October 13, 2026 — its first closed-source, paid frontier model. If you are deciding between Muse Wonder and Claude Opus 5.5, Gemini 4, GPT-6 or Meta's own Spark 1.3, this hub gives you the numbers side by side: API pricing, benchmark scores, context windows, coding-agent performance, and which model to pick for which job.
Quick answer
Claude Opus 5.5 still leads on raw capability (Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 58 vs Wonder Full's 56 and Wonder's 52). Muse Wonder Full ties Claude Sonnet 5.5 and is a serious coding-agent model (68 on the coding-agent index with Muse Code). Gemini 4 Argon is the value pick at half the price. Pick by use case below.
All Muse Wonder comparisons
- Muse Wonder vs Claude Opus 5.5
The headline matchup: benchmark leader vs the new challenger. Identical API pricing ($4/$20 per 1M tokens), ~1M-token context on both. Verdict by use case inside.
- Muse Wonder vs Gemini 4 (Argon)
Google's mid-October answer. Gemini 4 Argon costs half as much ($2/$10) with the same 1M context — the budget decision, explained.
- Muse Wonder vs GPT-6 (Astra / Sol)
OpenAI's flagship runs $10/$50 per 1M tokens with a 500K default context. When the premium is worth it, and when it isn't.
- Muse Wonder vs Spark 1.3
Upgrading within Meta? Spark 1.3 averages $1.60 per task vs Wonder's $4.52 — what you get for the ~3x cost.
- Muse Wonder API Pricing (Full Breakdown)
$4 input / $20 output per 1M tokens, $0.20 cached input, model ID muse-wonder-1.0. Plus app subscription tiers ($20–$200/mo) and how the price stacks up.
- Muse Wonder Subscription: Plans & Cost
All four tiers ($20 / $100 / $50 / $200 per month), the Full-vs-Max naming confusion solved, and subscription-vs-API math for your usage.
- How to Use Muse Wonder
What it is, the three access paths (app / Muse Code / API), what to use it for — and what not to use it for.
Muse Wonder at a glance
| Spec | Muse Wonder | Muse Wonder Full |
|---|---|---|
| Released | October 13, 2026 | October 13, 2026 |
| API price (in / out, per 1M) | $4 / $20 | Not available via API |
| Context window | ~1M tokens (1,048,576) | |
| Input / output | Text, image, video, audio, PDF in · text out | |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3 | 52 | 56 (ties Sonnet 5.5) |
| Coding-agent index (with Muse Code) | — | 68 (ties Sonnet 5.5 + Claude Code) |
| Signature features | Active Memory (cross-session), Active Focus (self-correction when blocked) | |
| Subscription access | Muse app $20 or $100/mo | Muse Code $50 or $200/mo |
How to choose in 30 seconds
| If you… | Pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Want the strongest all-round model, price no object | Opus 5.5 | Leads the Intelligence Index (58) and code-quality ceiling |
| Build coding agents on a budget | Muse Wonder Full (Muse Code) | Coding-agent score 68, ties Sonnet 5.5 + Claude Code |
| Need the cheapest frontier-quality API | Gemini 4 Argon | $2/$10 per 1M — half of Muse Wonder / Opus 5.5 |
| Already on Meta Spark and cost-sensitive | Stay on Spark 1.3 | ~$1.60 avg per task vs Wonder's $4.52 |
Where Muse Wonder genuinely wins
- Agent memory: Active Memory carries context, preferences and decisions across sessions — the differentiator Meta highlights, and the feature reviewers actually notice.
- Self-correction: Active Focus tries alternative paths when blocked instead of erroring out mid-task — a common agent failure mode.
- Coding agents: With Muse Code, Wonder Full hits 68 on the coding-agent index, tied with Sonnet 5.5 + Claude Code.
- Multimodal input: text, image, video, audio and PDF in a single ~1M-token context.
Where it loses
- Factual knowledge: AA-Omniscience 30 vs Opus 5.5's 46 — a wide gap on knowledge-heavy tasks.
- Short-range precision tasks are a noted weak spot in independent testing.
- Cost per task: $4.52 average vs Spark 1.3's $1.60 — nearly triple its predecessor.
- Availability: 18+ only; not offered in China (incl. Hong Kong and Macau) or Russia.
- Benchmark-vs-reality gap: several independent hands-on reviewers found real-world results behind the leaderboard position, with some ranking Kimi K3 ahead in practice.
About this site
This is an unofficial, independent comparison hub. All numbers are cited from Artificial Analysis benchmarks and vendor announcements, with the verification date on every page. See about and privacy.